Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Gpi8 brighton presentation

668 views

Published on

Global Peace Index

Published in: Government & Nonprofit
  • Be the first to comment

Gpi8 brighton presentation

  1. 1. Peace, Economics and Change Steve Killelea, Executive Chairman Institute for Economics and Peace Sussex University, Brighton Wednesday 4th March, 2015
  2. 2. Many Unprecedented Challenges Facing Humanity Challenges are global, urgent and require unparalleled co-operation Peace is the prerequisite for solving these problems
  3. 3. 2014 Global Peace Index Results Seven Year Trends in Peace The Global Costs of Violence Measuring Positive Peace Assessing Country Risk Agenda
  4. 4. INSTITUTE FOR ECONOMICS AND PEACE The Institute for Economics and Peace is an independent, not-for-profit, think tank dedicated to building a greater understanding of the key drivers and measures of peace and to identifying the economic benefits that increased peacefulness can deliver. Sydney, New York, Mexico City “ ”
  5. 5. DEFINING PEACE Measure two forms of Peace, “Positive Peace” and “Negative Peace” Peace is more than the absence of war Negative Peace defines peace as the “Absence of Violence” includes all forms of violence This definition allows for measurements of both internal and external peacefulness “Positive Peace” is uncovered via the correlation of other data sets, attitudinal surveys and indexes
  6. 6. Defining and Measuring Peace Actual peace Measures Crime Suppression Military War Positive Peace Derived through statistical analysis of datasets, indices and attitudes with the GPI The perfect state would have no Police, Jails or Crime GPI Positive Peace Index
  7. 7. THE GLOBAL PEACE INDEX Now in its eight year Ranks 162 countries According to their relative states of peace Using 22 indicators weighted on a 1-5 scale Developed by the Institute for Economics & Peace Guided and overseen by a Panel of International Experts With data collected and collated by the Economist Intelligence Unit
  8. 8. INDICATORS 5 measures of ongoing domestic and international conflict including: number of conflicts fought and number of deaths from organised conflict 10 measures of societal safety and security including: number of displaced people, number of terrorist acts, number of homicides, number of jailed population 7 measures of militarization including: military expenditure, number of armed service personnel, ease of access to small weapons
  9. 9. GPI 2014 RESULTS The 10 Most Peaceful Countries Rank Country Score 1 Iceland 1.189 2 Denmark 1.193 3 Austria 1.200 4 New Zealand 1.236 5 Switzerland 1.258 6 Finland 1.297 7 Canada 1.306 8 Japan 1.316 9 Belgium 1.354 10 Norway 1.371
  10. 10. GPI 2014 RESULTS The 10 Least Peaceful Countries Rank Country Score 162 Syria 3.65 161 Afghanistan 3.416 160 South Sudan 3.397 159 Iraq 3.377 158 Somalia 3.368 157 Sudan 3.362 156 Central African Rep. 3.331 155 Dem. Rep. of Congo 3.213 154 Pakistan 3.107 153 North Korea 3.071
  11. 11. 2014 Global Peace Index Results Seven Year Trends in Peace The Global Costs of Violence Measuring Positive Peace Assessing Country Risk Agenda
  12. 12. SEVEN YEAR TRENDS IN PEACE Safety and Security score – 5.3% decline,  major reason for deterioration Militarisation Score – No Change Ongoing Conflict Score – 4.7% Terrorist activity and Homicide largest declines 53 countries improved, 103 countries deteriorated Greatest deterioration in the MENA and Sub- Saharan Africa regions
  13. 13. TRENDS BY CATEGORY BIGGEST DETERIORATIONS BY CATEGORY 2008-2014 SAFETY & SECURITY Score Change ONGOING CONFLICT Score Change MILITARISATION Score Change Syria 4.18 2.03 Syria 3.60 1.80 Afghanistan 2.50 0.73 South Sudan 3.76 0.88 Ukraine 3.20 1.60 Syria 2.62 0.68 Central African Rep. 3.94 0.84 South Sudan 3.80 1.20 Norway 2.02 0.66 BIGGEST IMPROVEMENTS BY CATEGORY SAFETY & SECURITY Score Change ONGOING CONFLICT Score Change MILITARISATION Score Change Saudi Arabia 2.03 -0.49 Chad 2.60 -1.00 Montenegro 1.46 -0.72 Burundi 2.53 -0.44 Georgia 2.40 -0.60 Georgia 1.64 -0.56 Georgia 2.38 -0.41 Israel 2.40 -0.60 Armenia 1.64 -0.50
  14. 14. POPULATION DYNAMICS AND PEACE 1.500 1.700 1.900 2.100 2.300 2.500 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Very Large (>100 million) Large (Up to 100 million) Medium (up to 25 Million) Small (<5 million)
  15. 15. GLOBAL POPULATION BY PEACE 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 GPIRank GPI Score 11 Least Peaceful Countries • 560 million people • 200 million live on less than $2 a day
  16. 16. GLOBAL HOMICIDE RATES The average country homicide rate has been increasing since 2008 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 AverageCountryHomicideRate Intentional Homicide killed 437,000 people across the world in 2012 -UNODC
  17. 17. 0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 12,000 14,000 16,000 18,000 20,000 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 NumberofDeaths Global Total Rest of the World Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Nigeria and Syria September 11 Syrian Civil War beginsUS troop surge US invade IRAQ U.S. invade Afghanistan Five times more people died from terrorism in 2013 than 2000 Source: START GTD DEATHS FROM TERRORISM, 2000-2013
  18. 18. NUMBER OF COUNTRIES WITH 50+ DEATHS FROM TERRORISM 13 16 13 14 13 17 13 14 19 16 16 13 15 24 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 NumberofCountries 2013 recorded the largest number of countries with more than 50 deaths over the last 14 years Source: START GTD
  19. 19. TARGETS OF TERRORISM 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Private Citizens & Property Police Government (General) Business Transportation Religious Figures/Institutions The primary target of terrorism has consistently been private property and citizens Source: START GTD Private Citizens Police
  20. 20. CORRELATES OF TERRORISM Factors most closely associated with terrorism:  State sponsored violence – torture, killings  Intergroup cohesion  Legitimacy of the State  High levels of other forms of violence Factors not statistically associated with terrorism:  Poverty measures  Mean years of schooling  Life expectancy  Economic Indicators Terrorism is linked to political grievances rather than poverty measures
  21. 21. BELIEFS OF FOUR DEADLIEST GROUPS All 4 groups follow some form of Wahhabi theologies They all reject the concept of Western education Like rain. We believe it is a creation of God rather than an evaporation caused by the sun that condenses and becomes rain ... Like saying the world is a sphere. If it runs contrary to the teachings of Allah, we reject it. We also reject the theory of Darwinism – Mohammed Yusuf, Founder, Boko Haram Groups have differing goals and aims Moderate forms of Sunnis theologies need to be cultivated – difficult for West to influence All of the deadliest groups share a common basic set of beliefs
  22. 22. There are large variations on the number of fighters in the major terrorist groups NUMBER OF FIGHTERS 0 10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000 60,000 Taliban ISIL Al-Qa'ida (all major affiliates) Boko Haram Low estimate High estimate Sources: Various – see 2014 GTI
  23. 23. 2014 Global Peace Index Results Seven Year Trends in Peace The Global Costs of Violence Measuring Positive Peace Assessing Country Risk Agenda
  24. 24. Global Peace Index vs GDP per capita Small improvements in peace can be associated with substantial improvements in per capita income Source: World Bank, IEP
  25. 25. A Sound Business Environment The most peaceful countries consistently tended to have lower levels of inflation. Source Index Indicator Year Correlation Coefficient World Bank Ease of Doing Business Overall Rank 2011 0.542 Trading Across Borders 2011 0.524 Closing a Business 2011 0.512 World Economic Forum Global Competitivenes s Report Technological Readiness 2011 -0.643 Institutions 2011 -0.628 Basic Requirements 2011 -0.624 Higher Education and Training 2011 -0.598 Goods Market Efficiency 2011 -0.597 Overall Score 2011 -0.597 Infrastructure 2011 -0.588 Efficiency Enhancers 2011 -0.578 Innovation and Sophistication Factors 2011 -0.573 Health and Primary Education 2011 -0.512 Heritage Foundation Index of Economic Freedom Property Rights 2011 -0.673 Overall Score 2011 -0.602 Business Freedom 2011 -0.566 Financial Freedom 2011 -0.514 Economist Intelligence Unit GDP per capita 2011 -0.581 Legatum Foundation Legatum Prosperity Index Overall Score 2010 -0.756 Entrepreneurship and Opportunity Sub-Index Score 2010 -0.683 Capital Per Worker 2010 -0.606 Economy Sub-Index Score 2010 -0.551 World Bank World Development Indicators R+D Expenditure 2010 -0.582 Frazer Institute Economic Freedom of the World Index Overall Score 2008 -0.585
  26. 26. A Sound Business Environment The most peaceful countries consistently tended to have lower levels of inflation.
  27. 27. Violence and GDP per Capita Growth Countries that have improved levels of internal peace since 1996 have had larger GDP per Capita growth than countries that have deteriorated. Data Sources: World Bank, IEP. 3rd Quartile Median 1st Quartile 3rd Quartile Median 1st Quartile The distribution of GDP per Capita growth since 1996 is much higher in those countries that have also improved peace.
  28. 28. Positive Peace and GDP Countries that improved in positive peace since 1996 have had larger GDP per Capita growth than countries that have deteriorated. 3rd Quartile Median 1st Quartile 3rd Quartile Median 1st Quartile The distribution of GDP per Capita growth since 1996 is much higher in those countries that have also improved positive peace. Data Sources: World Bank, IEP Azerbaijan
  29. 29. Cost of Violence Methodology  Fourteen different domains  10 GPI measures  4 Other Domains  Costs based on established studies  Mainly direct costs, some indirect costs  Costs which fall due in current year  Costs scaled by per capita income to other countries  Multiplier factor of 1 used
  30. 30. Estimated to be US$9.8 trillion or 11.3% of Gross World Product in 2013 Individual Estimates for 162 Countries Allows cost benefit analysis Thirteen dimensions measured Increase of 3.8% from 2012 GLOBAL COST OF VIOLENCE
  31. 31. GLOBAL COST OF VIOLENCE IN 2013 - BROKEN DOWN VIOLENCE TYPE DIRECT COST ($ BILLION) Military expenditure $ 2,535 Homicides $ 720 Internal security $ 625 Violent crime $ 325 Private security $ 315 Incarceration $ 185 GDP losses from conflict $ 130 Deaths from internal conflict $ 30 Fear $ 25 Terrorism $ 10 UN Peacekeeping $ 5 IDPs and refugees $ 2 Deaths from external conflict $ 1 Total (direct only) $4,908 Total (including 1x1 peace multiplier) $9,816 One of the large areas of increase is related to Chinese military expenditure
  32. 32. 10 HIGHEST COUNTRIES ON VIOLENCE EXPENDITURE RANK COUNTRY COST IN USD 2013 ($ MIL PPP) COST PER PERSON (USD 2013 PPP) % Of GDP 1 North Korea $10,205 $410 25.5% 2 Syria $25,960 $1,160 24.1% 3 Afghanistan $8,305 $280 23.5% 4 Liberia $625 $150 21.6% 5 South Sudan $3,120 $290 21.2% 6 Honduras $7,525 $950 19.2% 7 Zimbabwe $1,425 $105 19.0% 8 Iraq $43,970 $1,350 17.7% 9 Somalia $1,015 $100 17.2% 10 Cote d' Ivoire $6,660 $335 15.2%
  33. 33. Top Ten countries with highest Violence containment per person Country Violence Containment cost per person (USD 2012) GDP Per capita % of per capita GDP United States of America $5,485 $42,486 13% Oman $3,610 $25,330 14% Qatar $3,575 $77,987 5% Kuwait $3,275 $47,935 7% Israel $3,240 $26,719 12% Singapore $3,175 $53,591 6% Libya $3,175 $13,300 24% Bahrain $2,745 $28,200 10% Trinidad and Tobago $2,535 $22,142 11% Saudi Arabia $2,360 $21,430 11%
  34. 34. Peace and Violence Containment The most peaceful states in Mexico will always have less violence containment spending AGU BCN BCSCAM COA COL CHP CHH DIF DUR GUA GRO HID JALMEX MIC MOR NAY NLE OAX PUE QUE ROO SLP SIN SON TAB TAM TLA VER YUC ZAC 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 Perpersonviolencecontainmentcosts Thousands MORE PEACEFUL - MPI Score - LESS PEACEFULL R = 0.872
  35. 35. Mexico Peace and Income Per capita growth five most peace states and five least peaceful states
  36. 36. POVERTY, RISK AND IMPACT COUNTRY IEP RISK SCORE PER PERSON IMPACT OF MINOR RISE IN VIOLENCE ($ PPP) PER CAPITA RISK ($ PPP) (LIKELIHOOD X IMPACT) PEOPLE WHO COULD DROP BELOW $1.25 A DAY Chad 74/100 $10.2 $7.6 5.5M Myanmar 59/100 $10.6 $6.2 * Angola 19/100 $31.0 $5.9 3.2M Zambia 86/100 $ 5.5 $4.7 * Papua New Guinea 41/100 $10.3 $4.2 * Haiti 78/100 $ 4.7 $3.7 * Nepal 70/100 $ 4.8 $3.3 0.4M Kenya 42/100 $ 7.0 $3.0 1.5M Benin 41/100 $ 6.0 $2.5 0.5M Uganda 32/100 $ 6.0 $1.9 0.9M
  37. 37. 2014 Global Peace Index Results Seven Year Trends in Peace The Global Costs of Violence Measuring Positive Peace Assessing Country Risk Agenda
  38. 38. The Pillars of Peace: “The attitudes, institutions and structures that help create and sustain a peaceful society”
  39. 39. The Pillars of Peace The attitudes, institutions and structures that sustain a peaceful society Analysed over 4,700 variables covering:  Macro-economy;  Social relations and attitudes;  Economic and social development;  Economic and social integration;  The functioning and structure of government  External Relations
  40. 40. The Pillars of Peace The attitudes, institutions and structures that sustain a peaceful society Free Flow of Information Peace & Resilience Good Relations with Neighbours Acceptance of the Rights of Others Equitable Distribution of Resources Sound business environmen t Well functioning governmen t A High- Level of Human Capital Low-Levels of Corruption
  41. 41.  Peaceful Societies are more Resilient  Pillars of Peace Operate as a System  Pillars of Peace are statistically associated with:  Strong Business Environments  Gender Equality  Transparency  Better personal Relations Optimum Environment for Human Potential to Flourish
  42. 42. Positive Peace Index Indicators INSERT MAP Positive Peace Index 2013
  43. 43. Weak Pillars = Greater Vulnerability Big fallers with positive peace deficits in 2008: Syria Rwanda Madagascar Egypt
  44. 44. Peace, MDGs and Development Iraq Haiti Guinea-Bissau Montenegro Liberia Kenya Burundi Papua New Guinea UkraineTanzania Zimbabwe Gabon Somalia Central African Republic Democratic Republic of the CongoCote d'Ivoire Afghanistan -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 1.8 2.3 2.8 3.3 3.8 4.3 MDGProgressScore2010-2011 2008 Global Peace Index Developing nations with stronger pillars have achieve more of their MDGs.
  45. 45. 2014 Global Peace Index Results Seven Year Trends in Peace The Global Costs of Violence Measuring Positive Peace Assessing Country Risk Agenda
  46. 46. The Pillars of Peace Framework provides an fluid environment for the achievement of many of the gaols that civil societies consider important Framework Correlates with:  Higher GDP  Lower inflation  More ecologically sound  Strong business environment  Higher levels of human capital  Perform well on human development indicators Source: Pillars of Peace, Institute for Economics and Peace, 2013
  47. 47. OVERALL VISION IEP’s Risk Tool uses a ‘Risk and Opportunity’ approach to assess country risk Risk Opportunity
  48. 48. CONCEPTUAL BASIS OF RISK TOOL Measure Violence Understand Positive Peace Measure Positive Peace Differences Equals Risk or Opportunity Pillars of Peace is the contextual framework underlining Positive Peace Positive Peace and Actual peace align over the longer term
  49. 49. RISK AND RESILIENCE Strong link between violence and positive peace Denmark SwedenIceland CanadaGermany United Kingdom France United States of America Portugal Chile South KoreaItaly Uruguay Greece IsraelCosta RicaQatar Croatia Malaysia BahrainOmanArgentina Macedonia (FYR) South AfricaBrazilGhana MexicoPeru GeorgiaMongolia ThailandKazakhstanJordan ColombiaTurkey Saudi Arabia Ukraine VietnamIndonesia RussiaChina Ecuador Algeria PhilippinesSenegal India EgyptTanzania BelarusZambia MaliCambodia SyriaMadagascar Bangladesh RwandaNepal UgandaLaos IranLiberiaSierra Leone Mauritania EthiopiaHaiti Pakistan YemenDRC 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 POSITIVEPEACEINDEXRANK2010 GLOBAL PEACE INDEX RANK 2014
  50. 50. Countries at Most Risk in 2008 Using Positive Peace Model Countries with weak institutions in 2008 Bangladesh Belarus Bolivia Burkina Faso Cameroon China Egypt Gabon Ghana Indonesia Iran Jordan Kazakhstan Laos Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Morocco Mozambique Nicaragua Rwanda Romania Syria Senegal Tunisia Tanzania Vietnam Ukraine Zambia Yemen Most countries with institutions weaker than their peace in 2008 deteriorated by 2012 Red = Deteriorated Green = No Deterioration Source: IEP
  51. 51. IEP RISK MODELS IEP presents two risk models in GPI 2014 report Positive Peace Deficit Model – Analyses global outliers based on the difference between positive and actual peace Like Country Model – Analyses historical peace trends of a country and compares them to the history of other countries of similar positive peace levels
  52. 52. IEP RISK COMPARISON Prominent fragility measures compared to IEP risk models for 2008 to 2014. Largest Falls 2008-2013 Change in GPI Score World Bank as Fragile in 2008 Failed States Index 2008 State Fragility Index 2008 IEP Models Syria -70% No Yes No Yes Libya -39% No No No Yes Rwanda -31% No No No Yes Madagascar -27% Yes No No Yes Oman -23% No No No Yes Tunisia -21% No No No Yes Cote d'Ivoire -19% No Yes No Yes Yemen -18% No Yes No Yes Mexico -18% No No No No Bahrain -17% No No No Yes Identified 1/10 3/10 0/10 9/10
  53. 53. RESULTS OF RISK TOOL ANALYSIS 2014 Countries most at risk of small to medium deteriorations in peace COUNTRY GOVERNMENT INCOME IEP COUNTRY RISK SCORE (OUT OF 100) Zambia Hybrid regime Lower middle income 86 Haiti Hybrid regime Low income 78 Argentina Flawed democracy Upper middle income 76 Chad Authoritarian regime Low income 74 Bosnia And Herzegovina Hybrid regime Upper middle income 72 Nepal Hybrid regime Low income 70 Burundi Hybrid regime Low income 70 Georgia Hybrid regime Lower middle income 70 Liberia Hybrid regime Low income 67 Qatar Authoritarian regime High income 65
  54. 54. IEP RESEARCH OUTPUTS

×